ArticleJournal of imaging2026
An Unsupervised Deep Learning Framework for Quantitative Breast Density Estimation from Mammograms.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women, with early detection playing a critical role in clinical outcomes. Mammography remains the standard screening modality, producing X-ray images used to assess mammographic density, a key indicator of the proportion of fibroglandular tissue within the breast. The Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) classification system is widely used to report density across four qualitative categories. High density can obscure malignancies and is independently associated with elevated breast cancer risk. Manual interpretation of mammographic density is prone to subjectivity and inter-observer variability, and supervised learning-based estimation methods trained on subjective labels may reflect this inherent subjectivity. This work proposes an unsupervised framework for quantitative breast density estimation that requires no labeled data in its core pipeline. Expert labels are used exclusively to calibrate post hoc discretization thresholds for binary classification, enabling comparison with supervised methods in the literature. The main contributions include: (i) an adaptive Region of Interest (ROI) extraction algorithm, (ii) a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) based unsupervised segmentation pipeline tuned for mammographic density separation, (iii) a novel confidence metric for identifying unreliable segmentation outputs, (iv) a label correction mechanism for low-confidence cases, and (v) a confidence-filtered majority voting scheme for per-patient classification. The framework is evaluated on two public datasets, namely DDSM and INbreast, with segmentation performance yielding Silhouette scores exceeding 0.92. Agreement with expert labels reaches 71.43% and 79.28% for DDSM and INbreast, respectively. Image-level clustering quality assessment confirms effective unsupervised labeling, with Silhouette scores averaging 0.57 for DDSM and 0.50 for INbreast. The proposed framework provides a practical and non-subjective model for quantitative breast density estimation, with potential utility as a decision-support tool for radiologists that can be considered in clinical practice after further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.